Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Hitachi Debuts 7,200 RPM 3TB HDD

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 39 comments
Tags :

Hitachi's latest 3.5-inch, 7200 RPM HDD has a tasty 3 TB capacity.

Various reports point to a new 7200 RPM, 3.5-inch HDD that Hitachi recently added to its roster. Called the Deskstar 7K3000, the drive features 5 platters and a meaty 3 TB of storage. It also follows Hitachi's previous 7200 RPM entry in the market which offered a slightly smaller 2 TB capacity.

According to the company, the 7K3000 is the first Hitachi hard drive with a 6 Gb/s SATA interface. It also features a 64 MB cache buffer, an eco-friendly, Halogen-free design, and an idle power draw of 6.8W.

"The Deskstar 7K3000 is designed to allow manufacturers to leverage the benefits of the latest components and operating systems to deliver high-performance, high-capacity, power-efficient systems," Hitachi said.

The company also points consumers here, explaining that they can't simply shove a 3 TB drive into any rig.

"A data drive greater than or equal to 2.2 TB requires an operating system that supports long LBA addressing, such as Windows 7, a GUID partition table (GPT) and HDD drivers that support 2.2 TB drives," Hitachi states. "In addition to the requirements for a data drive, a Windows boot drive requires an EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface) BIOS and a 64-bit version of Windows Vista or Windows 7. Linux does not require an EFI BIOS."

Currently there's no pricing or a release date, however it's speculated that the drive will cost around $320 USD. Hitachi also offers a 1.5 TB and 2 TB model.

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
  • 2 Hide
    qu3becker , November 18, 2010 11:33 PM
    I want cheaper hard drive that can spin faster instead of more storage. Big, "slow" hard drive are cheap. SSD and 10,000 RPM hard drive aren't.
  • 1 Hide
    TheWhiteRose000 , November 18, 2010 11:39 PM
    Wants one.
  • -1 Hide
    eleclerc , November 18, 2010 11:41 PM
    3TB, just 10 times bigger than mine!
  • Display all 39 comments.
  • 1 Hide
    shovenose , November 18, 2010 11:49 PM
    3tb, just 20 times bigger than mine :) 
  • -3 Hide
    tronika , November 18, 2010 11:50 PM
    raid 0 these babes for "unlimited" space. sweet.
  • 5 Hide
    theshonen8899 , November 19, 2010 12:00 AM
    I have a Hitachi 2TB and I'm really happy with it. Now if only they had 5 year warranties...
  • 4 Hide
    darkavenger123 , November 19, 2010 12:14 AM
    Ooohh...DESKSTAR....not a good name. Old timers will remember IBM once released a hard disk called Deskstar...it was plagued with problems...and eventually it is known as the "DeahStar" ala StarWars. LOL.
  • 2 Hide
    bison88 , November 19, 2010 12:14 AM
    qu3beckerI want cheaper hard drive that can spin faster instead of more storage. Big, "slow" hard drive are cheap. SSD and 10,000 RPM hard drive aren't.



    I was reading on another site saying the Hitachi Drive is claiming 170MBps for the 5,400 and 210MBps read/writes for the 7,200 drives. If that article was correct then those would be some of the fastest and largest single drives for consumers. Although I've yet to see a single consumer HDD go above 120MBps steady myself. I'm wondering how they are able to do that given they didn't release that info.

  • 1 Hide
    darkavenger123 , November 19, 2010 12:16 AM
    Oopss..typo...i meant IBM "DeathStar".
  • 5 Hide
    chickenhoagie , November 19, 2010 12:22 AM
    darkavenger123Ooohh...DESKSTAR....not a good name. Old timers will remember IBM once released a hard disk called Deskstar...it was plagued with problems...and eventually it is known as the "DeahStar" ala StarWars. LOL.

    sheesh, you think Deskstar was bad(Which, yeah it was)..as an employee for a technology recycler, out of the thousands and thousands of harddrives that i see come through every day, nothing is more notorious than the Quantum fireball. Yeah, good luck finding one of those that works.
  • -3 Hide
    skittle , November 19, 2010 12:25 AM
    idle ~7w ??? no thanks...
  • 3 Hide
    JOSHSKORN , November 19, 2010 12:31 AM
    Quote:
    It also follows Hitachi's previous 7200 RPM entry in the market which offered a slightly smaller 2 TB capacity.

    Hmm...slightly? Hardly.
  • -6 Hide
    pjmelect , November 19, 2010 12:35 AM
    How do you boot from it?
  • 1 Hide
    cletus_slackjawd , November 19, 2010 12:48 AM
    Looks good. The only thing I worry about is the 5 platter design. More internal parts gives a higher chance to fail. That's why I've purchased a half dozen 2 platter harddrives over the last year.
  • 0 Hide
    LuckyDucky7 , November 19, 2010 12:51 AM
    "Linux does not require an EFI BIOS."

    Come on, Microsoft. Windows 7 64-bit w/ SP1 should be booting from this drive on a BIOS computer.
  • 0 Hide
    gmarsack , November 19, 2010 12:55 AM
    darkavenger123Ooohh...DESKSTAR....not a good name. Old timers will remember IBM once released a hard disk called Deskstar...it was plagued with problems...and eventually it is known as the "DeahStar" ala StarWars. LOL.

    Yes, I remember this.. I owned 3 of the IBM Desk Star 60GB's.. guess what happened to all three... dead. lol
  • 4 Hide
    rpgplayer , November 19, 2010 1:03 AM
    lol i still have a Bigfoot 5 1/4" 1.5gb hard drive i got a copy of windows 3.1 on it just for nostalgia.
  • 7 Hide
    Anonymous , November 19, 2010 1:09 AM
    Speculated $320? I hope not.

    Newegg just recently had a major early Black Friday price sweep and a 2TB Samsung drive was on sale for $79.99 (with free shipping). For $320 I could've bought 4 of those 2TB drives for a total of 8 terabytes at about the same price as this 3TB drive.

    Even though the Samsung drive is only a 5,400RPM 2TB drive with SATA 3.0GB/s, a 7,200RPM 3TB drive with SATA 6.0GB/s shouldn't cost 4x as much. $220 sounds much more reasonable.
  • 7 Hide
    Anonymous , November 19, 2010 1:13 AM
    Quote: "Linux does not require an EFI BIOS."

    Come on, Microsoft. Windows 7 64-bit w/ SP1 should be booting from this drive on a BIOS computer.



    How about: Come on Microsoft, a 32 bit Linux install(or a 32 bit Windows Server Data Center Edition install) can properly address 64 GB of ram because it has a proper PAE implentation, why do you force us to upgrade to 64 bit to use more ram on a standard Windows install?
Display more comments